Domenico Andreoli just announced to the world that he’s orphaning the pycurl package in Debian. pycurl is the fairly popular Python binding for libcurl written by Kjetil Jacobsen.
Fans of Debian, libcurl and python now have a fine chance to step forwards and contribute!
Update: Sandra Tosi “took it“.
libcurl’s two newly added functions curl_easy_send() and curl_easy_recv() add a new way of working with data in libcurl. These two are just sending and receiving whatever on a connection previously setup with curl_easy_perform() with the CONNECT_ONLY option set.
I haven’t yet made the web site display the man pages for these functions, as the patch for them was just committed minutes ago. Update: the man pages is now added and this post has the links.
Get a feel for how it can work by reading the sendrecv.c example source.
The curl project continues to conquer new markets and it continues to get ported to more platforms and operating systems. Just recently there have been reports about…
I’m trying to maintain a list of all CPUs and operating systems we have known ports being run on and if you have curl and/or libcurl running on another than the ones I list at the bottom of the INSTALL document, please let me know!
Less is more it is said, and I can certainly subscribe to the reverse: more means less. The two primary open source projects I spend time in have been growing the last years, in source code contributions, but also in amount of users and in amount of contributors. I see the similar effects on myself and on my own role in both Rockbox and curl: I do more and more coordination, planning, admin work, talk (chatting on IRC, responding to mails etc) and “guidance” than actual coding work. My code/non-code work ratio has decreased massively.
This is not complaint, just an observation!
It makes sense to me that early on in a project, and until there’s enough momentum to get the project to more or less drive itself, it is important with a driving core that pushes the project forward. That makes sure every little peace fits together and gets the proper attention to make it a good product and project. As time goes by, more and more people get that knowledge, that ability and the amount of people that drive the project forward increases.
So being an “elderly” in both these projects, I’m more of an advisor, talker, tinker, admin, than a lead programmer now. This is at least most notable in Rockbox, since we have 80 committers now and I think at least 50 of them are active.
I probably spend roughly the same amount of time: somewhere around 2-3 hours/day on my open source projects.
Of course, in my particular case exactly now, I’ve also just recently ramped up my working hours and find myself trying to get accustomed to this life with full-time work, a two-kids-and-wife family and several time-consuming spare time projects. It takes a great deal of juggling and less sleeping.
Nothing is forever so I’m certain my situation will change over time. I’m determined to continue hacking in both projects. And my juggling skills will improve…
Occasionally people ask me or just mock me because we’re still using CVS in the curl project, even though there are much more compelling alternatives out there now. Subversion, git, Bzr, Mercurial, etc. I am even a contributor and committer in the Subversion project. (Although I’ll be the first to admit that I never committed much and the stuff I did was done many years ago.)
CVS just isn’t bad enough to warrant the work of a replacement. curl is a tiny project (source code wise) and while CVS has several flaws in how it is designed and works, those flaws never hurt us much. Basically the only one is the lack of rename support and that has no major impact on us.
On the contrary, CVS has the upside of being established and rock solid since many years so people on all sorts of platforms can use it and get the curl source code. This is important especially for our automated build-system which we try hard to find volunteers for to run automatically daily around-the-clock (the results and outputs are then mailed to our central autobuild master server that collects and presents them) and then those guys need to be able to checkout the code easily. Using more modern tools will make it harder since those aren’t available as widely as binary packages for as many (outdated) platforms as CVS is.
So curl sticks with CVS for now.
On the libcurl list the discussion popped up how to best add support to do HTTP over unix domain sockets instead of TCP/IP and the discussion took off trying to figure out how to specify this the best way from an application’s point of view.
What’s your take on this?
It’s been a while since we had this discussion so I figure it is about time to re-iterate it and this time I thought I’d do a little blog post to put the lights on my stand-point regarding this issue:
I’ve had this discussion at length with Anthony Bryan (the main man behind the metalink format) privately in the past and I’ve bounced back a lot of feedback on the actual XML format to him and I believe some of that were taken into account and changed the format. Of course this was before it “settled” and started to get adopted. I think metalink is a great idea and the file format is (the last time I checked it out, I can’t seem to find the docs now) mostly making sense.
I have little to no understanding for the idea that libcurl should add support for this natively. metalink is just an XML format that sets up resources for an application to where and how it can download files, and libcurl does indeed support most of the protocols that such URLs can use. libcurl is a data transfer library that is oriented around a given URL and the URL in question has a 1:1 relationship to what protocol it is and it is always content-agnostic.
metalink is application layer, not transport. Adding metalink to libcurl would mean that all of a sudden libcurl would transfer a file and actually parse the (XML!) contents of that file and then get (possibly) multiple streams using multiple protocols based on what that parsing gave. It is just so many new things and violations against key libcurl concepts that I cannot see this done.
Metalink isn’t even a standard so we would then more or less open the gates for further random efforts to introduce similar ideas and whatnot and where would we draw the line? Currently I think we have a pretty solid border drawn in the sand and we don’t cross that line (on purpose).
And frankly, there is only one and one reason only (mentioned and that I can think of) for libcurl to support this feature and I that is because libcurl is already widely adopted it would be easier for metalink to conquer the world by sneaking in the back-door with libcurl as then a large amount of applications would support it with no additional efforts at all. But sorry, I don’t think that’s a good enough reason to break or change these important key concepts/limits of libcurl. (Actually, I think it is a bit foolish to think that adding metalink to libcurl would make all these applications automatically support metalink as there would be several arguments against that too.)
As I’ve said before, I think one of our biggest challenges in this project is to limit what libcurl does, to not allow it to grow in all directions, to keep the scope and to maintain focus.
A metalink file transfer library could be made as a layer on top of libcurl, and I think that is the only logical and sensible way.
Adding metalink support to the curl tool however, seems like a good idea to me…
Mainly thanks to the 22 friends named in the release notes, curl and libcurl 7.18.1 was released today with the news and fixes that should prove this the best curl and libcurl versions ever – I guess we always have to believe that our latest is the greatest, why else would we release it?
The release notes identifies 23 bug fixes we did during the two months since the last release, and the news we introduce include these goodies:
As usual, you can download it here.
As probably one of the last humans on earth, I got my paper version of Linux Journal’s April 2008 issue in my mailbox today. While I’ve felt that the magazine has slowly degraded over the last years, this issue certainly made me all warm and fuzzy inside since it contains not one but two articles on subjects very dear to me. A three-page article was dedicated to a Rockbox review (subscription-required-to-read link) named “iPod + Rockbox =
Entertainment Extravaganza” and there was a two-page article on how to use curl (another paid-subscription-required link)to fiddle with a web interface named “Twittering from the Command Line”.
I have a hard time to put a finger on exactly why I feel that the magazine has lost some of its past qualities but I’ve noticed that I finish the magazine much faster these days and I generally skip over more uninteresting articles. I haven’t really investigated this, but it may very well be because a shift in focus in the magazine. I tend to be interested in low-level, kernel, OS, hardware-touching, libraries and related stuff. Not so much in high-level applications or web frameworks and more user and desktop oriented fluff.
I should also add that the Rockbox review was pretty good. Not perfect in any way since it contained errors, was for an old boring grayscale-ipod target and suggested that the original OS is better suited for playing music… The article that mentioned curl wasn’t really about curl but only showed how it can be used but it was mentioned in positive terms at least!
On March 20th 1998 curl 4 was released. It was the first curl release ever even if already at version 4 since we kept the version number from the previous projects we did before curl – using other names. We started it all with having the tool named httpget (which was an existing small tool written by Rafael Sagula), soon changed name to urlget to end up with curl – all renames happening due to shifting features and focus.
Like many other projects, this started because of an itch. I wanted to get currency rates off the internet to allow an IRC bot to be able to provide an “exchange service” for users with accurate up-to-date rates. I thought the existing projects I found all did too much or did the wrong thing. That bot and service is now gone since long.
curl has been a truly portable project from day 1, and the first windows build was already urlget 2.1 (pre-curl). autoconf support for the build process was added in October 1998.
Unfortunately I don’t have the original release 4 tarball left anymore, the closest one I have is curl 4.8 (dated August 31 1998). curl 4.8 is about 3400 lines of code. Today we’re totaling in well over 100K source lines, so it has grown over 30 times!
I had no big plans for curl nor did I think very much about the future of the project. I just added the features I and my fellow contributors wanted to have for the moment. That’s actually pretty much how the project has continued to work. We don’t have many long-term plans for what to do with it, we mostly look just inches ahead of our noses and act accordingly.
During the version 6 period (Sep 1999 – Mar 2000) we learned that curl was getting popular, was useful and worked rather well, so the work on providing a libcurl started. We wanted to offer other applications the ability to use curl’s file transfer powers. Version 7.1 was released in August 2000 and thus libcurl was officially born.
curl and libcurl remained being a rather low-key project, I just work on it on my spare time and there are no full-time developers paid to work on this project – apart from some occasional sub-projects now and then that have been sponsored by companies and organizations. (See later on for an example.)
Slowly but surely more and more people started using libcurl and contributed with bug reports and patches. When the project turned 5 years in 2003 I collected all the names of all contributors so far and I reached the number 270. I found the number very high and I was mostly kidding when I said I hoped we would double that amount by the time we celebrate our tenth anniversary. Of course we’ve more than doubled that amount today when we have more than 620 named contributors so far – and continuously adding new ones with every release.
During this journey of a decade, I’ve remained the lead developer and project leader but we’re now some 10 developers with commit access (that also use it) and I try to be open and responsive in order to attract more developers to come aboard, to listen to their advice and ideas and to be sensitive on what our users want from us.
In 2005 I was lucky enough to get a grant from the Swedish IIS organization for the purpose of developing a new event-based API for libcurl to better deal with very large amount of connections, the problem so nicely called c10k.
In the days when our humble project turns 10, I spend about two hours spare time per day on the project and it is my primary hobby, we make 5-6 releases per year, we get about 7000 unique visitors on the web site a normal day, about one million curl packages are downloaded per year – from our servers.
Today, libcurl is feature-rich, portable, very widely used, very fast, well supported and there are no signs of stagnation in release nor development pace. In fact, looking at the source-code growth over the last couple of years we can see a pretty stable and continuous growth:
Just as I never looked ahead and planned for the future much in the past, I don’t do that now either so I really don’t know and can’t tell what the future will hold for us. We’ll just continue to develop the world’s best client-side file transfer library, to make it even more solid for the foreseeable future, to make it do the things users and developers out there think it should do. Possibly that involves adding support for more protocols, removing some of the less popular ones or simply by enhancing how we support the existing ones.
Join the mailing lists and join us for the next ten years to come!